It’s time to tackle the 900 pound gorilla in the room: Senate Bill 5.
There are a number of media ads which present some (but not all) of the facts. And these omissions make the difference.
For example, on Sept. 27, an ad began airing claiming that SB 5 would curtail the level of care given by nurses, due to cuts in staffing.
Although there are about 160,000 registered nurses in Ohio, only four to six percent are public employees who would be affected by SB 5.
This ad does not distinguish between the small number of publicly-employed nurses and the much larger group of non-public nurses.
Another ad deals with the negative implications of SB 5 on public school teachers.
Teaching is a noble profession and it’s professionals are sorely underpaid. But teachers’ unions are an entirely different matter. Their motives can and should be scrutinized and questioned. Albert Shanker, the long-time national teachers’ union president is reported to have said, “When school children start paying union dues, that’s when I’ll start representing the interests of school children.”
So when the unions say, “it’s for the kids,” think twice.
Or how about this ad: “Ohio politicians used a loophole to exempt themselves from SB 5.” Ohio’s elected officials are exempt from collective bargaining laws, and have been since 1983, when public employees’ unions gained the right to collectively bargain.
To say that there is an exemption for politicians is true; to state the exemption is due to SB 5 is manifestly false. And yes, Ohio politicians already pay 15 percent into their medical plan and 10 percent for their pensions.
We also hear a good deal of overheated rhetoric about “politicians cutting costs on the back of the middle class.” Northern Ohio’s Morning Journal stated that over 350,000 workers would be affected by SB 5. The total Ohio workforce is about 5.9 million workers, according to Ohiomeansbusiness.com.
Do the math; the number and percentage of public workers affected by SB 5 is a relatively small part of the total Ohio workforce, which presumably forms the bulk of the “middle class.” Representing only 6 percent of the entire Ohio workforce, the Ohio public employees’ unions are a little presumptuous to speak for the “middle class.” Who elected them?
Other ads contain the implication that SB 5 would make it illegal for public safety employees to strike. Not true; they’re already forbidden to strike. SB 5 is irrelevant.
SB 5 requires public employees to pay more for medical and retirement benefits. Asking public employees to pay more of the cost of medical or retirement benefits seems reasonable. After all, the employees benefit, not the employer.
Toledo Mayor Bell is in favor of SB 5, as are a number of school district administrators. That in itself is instructive.
These are people who actually have to live in the “real world” and have to look at the “big picture”, balance budgets, and are responsible to a large cross section of constituents, unlike the unions and their leadership, who don’t have to worry about pictures any bigger than their own membership roster and the next union election.
Let’s acknowledge that SB 5 is a partially-flawed piece of legislation. But the biggest single problem with its repeal is that it will set Ohio and its’ taxpayers back to exactly the same position prior to SB 5. We’ll have to start over from scratch to cut costs and endure all the name-calling and false advertising again. Remember the definition of insanity: doing the same thing repeatedly and expecting different results.
The best bet is to vote for SB 5 (holding one’s nose if necessary), and then work to change the parts that need to be changed when the atmosphere is calmer and more conducive to reason.
Right now, it’s an all-or-nothing choice that voters in a high-pressure environment shouldn’t have to make under an election-date deadline.
That’s why we elect state senators and representatives.
Respond to Phil at
